A research and education initiative at the MIT
Sloan School of Management
Customer Advocacy: Is It for You?
Paper 175
Glen L. Urban
October 2003
For more information,
please visit our website at http://ebusiness.mit.edu
or contact the Center directly at ebusiness@mit.edu
or 617-253-7054
CUSTOMER ADVOCACY– IS IT FOR YOU?
by Glen L. Urban
Alfred P. Sloan School of Management
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Draft October 22, 2003
(5,000 words)
Customer Power is growing, and you need to decide what to do about it. I propose that you
advocate for your customers and earn their trust. It may not be a strategy for everyone, but
innovative companies are following this path. The marketing paradigm is shifting, signaling that
you should probably shift your strategy to suit.
Customer Power is Growing – Watch Out!
Customer power is growing -- customers now have tools that inform them of the true state of
affairs. This power enables them to avoid the pushy messages of marketers, make their own
decisions and determine what to buy. Five trends create increasing customer power and
motivate companies to become more trustworthy.
1) Increasing Access to Information
From ConsumerReports.org to epinions.com to Amazon's reader reviews to eBay’s seller ratings,
consumers now enjoy much greater access to independent information about products and
services. For example, 60 percent of U.S. car buyers now use the Internet to research models,
features, and prices -- visiting an average of 7 different sites such as Kelly Blue Book,
Autobytel, and Edmunds1. And 6 percent go on to save an average of $450 per vehicle by using
an Internet buying service2.
1
J.D. Power, “2002 New Autoshopper.Com Study” (J.D. Power, West Lake Village, Ca), October 2002
2
2) Access to More Alternatives
The Internet reduces the search costs for customers to find competing products. Comparison
sites, online reviews, and shopbots all enable customers to find the best products at the lowest
cost. For example, travelers now enjoy a range of websites (e.g., Travelocity, Orbitz, Expedia,
etc.) that help them find the lowest fares on flights. Over 35 percent of leisure travelers utilize
the Internet for research. Internet sales grew 37 percent in 2002 to $28 billion while total travel
services fell 5 percent3. Sixteen percent of all travel bookings were purchased online in 2003.
3) More Simplified Transactions
The Internet simplifies transactions for both consumers and industrial customers. Customers can
now connect directly with providers and easily buy goods and services. For example, electronic
airline tickets eliminate the need for physically obtaining paper tickets, reducing people’s
dependency on physically local travel agents. Simplified transactions enable switching – the
Internet gives customers the power to both find and buy from a wider array of potential
providers.
4) Increasing Communication Between Customers
The Internet allows consultation and collaboration between consumers. In healthcare, 110
million people in the United States looked on the Internet for information in 2002 (plus 48
million in Japan, 31 million in Germany, and 14 million in France)4. Patients exchange
information on the effectiveness of products and provide advice on how to take control of their
2
Fiona Scott Morton, Florian Zettelmeyer, and Jorge Silva Risso, “Internet Car Retailing” The Journal of Industiral
Economics , December 2001,v XLIX (No. 4), pp. 501-19.
3
PhoCusWright, "Online Travel Overview" February 2003, p. 1.1
4
Harris Interactive, “Four Nation Survey Shows Widespread but Different Levels of Internet Use for Health
Purposes” in Health Care News, v. 2, No. 11 (May, 2002) Harris Interactive, 2002
3
medical treatment. When a customer requests a specific prescription, 86 percent of the time that
request is honored by the medical provider.5
5) Customer Distrust and Resentment
Nearly 70 percent of Americans agree with the statement, "I don't know whom to trust anymore,"
according to a February 2002 Golin/Harris Poll6. Companies are tarnished by accounting
scandals and CEOs have lost credibility due to their excessive salaries. Furthermore, customers
are resentful of current marketing tactics. Fifty million people signed up for "no call" protection.
Eighty percent of consumers are "furious" about pop up ads on their screens -- the same
percentage as are furious over spam7. This resentment makes consumers fight back.
The point is that the Internet is a great enabler of consumer power. Consumers are more educated
and more informed than ever, and they have more tools with which to verify a company's claims
or to seek out superior product and service options. Companies must decide what to do in the
face of this growing force.
How Should a Company Respond?
One answer is to “push harder” with traditional marketing methods to torment customers.
Another choice is to strengthen relationships, and the third choice is advocating for your
customers.
Push Harder: It is tempting to respond to the new power of customers by pushing harder to get
results through increased media advertising, aggressive promotion, and one-sided
5
Manhattan Research, “Cybercitizen Health – The Integration of Information Technology and Consumer
Healthcare” 2002
6
7
James Lukaszewski, editor, Trust (Golin/Harris, 111 East Wacker Drive, Chicago, Ill), February 2002
Advertising Age, September, 2003
4
communication that may mislead customers but get the job done. After all, those tactics have
been the core of marketing for the last 50 years. But modern-day consumers are far harder to
reach and far harder to sway than their more gullible, accessible forefathers. In the halcyon days
of media, everyone read their local newspaper and watched the three national broadcast TV
channels. The national broadcast networks that formerly enjoyed large audiences have seen the
number of prime-time viewers drop over 50 percent since 1970, and much more when compared
to the 1960s. Over 100 channels are available in the more than three-quarters of households that
use cable or satellite, fragmenting the TV media. It is harder for marketers to push their
messages to the millions of eyeballs that they need. Even if the customer is exposed to a TV ad,
only 1/3 actually watch the ad -- the others mute the ad, switch channels, or leave the room.8
Worse, many are switching from the TV screen to the computer screen. Average use of the
Internet is almost the same as the TV viewing time, at 15 hours per week, and 36 percent of
people say they are watching less TV.9 But even on the Internet, with its deftly targeted pop-up
and banner ads, click-through rates have fallen from 2.1 percent in 1996 to less than 0.28 percent
in 200110. Internet service providers and software vendors tout their ability to block pop-ups and
spam. Push marketing’s reach and effectiveness has dropped dramatically.
Strengthen Relationships: In recent years, leading companies have undertaken the strategy of
relationship marketing. Building better products through Total Quality Management and
emphasizing service, companies have increased customer satisfaction. Backed by Customer
Relationship Management software and one-to-one marketing concepts, these companies can
target their consumers better and are more efficient in delivering persuasive information and
8
Tandemar Corporation, “Quality of TV Viewing Experience” (Tandemar Corporation, Canada) 2000
9
Jupiter Research, “Marketing and Branding Forecast”, Marketing and Branding, v.2 (Jupiter Research, New York,
N.Y.) 2002
10
Jupiter Research, “Marketing and Branding Forecast”, Marketing and Branding, v.2 (Jupiter Research, New
York, N.Y.) 2002
5
promotions. This is more agreeable to customers in the new power relationship – better service
and more targeted offerings do provide some competitive advantage. But it is not enough. Most
CRM programs are based on building a data warehouse, mining the data, and then hitting the
identified segments with aggressive email, phone, and Internet promotions with or without their
permission. Customers demand more, given their new power.
Customer Advocacy: Truly representing your customers' interests is the essence of this third
strategy. It means giving customers open, honest and complete information and finding the best
products for them even if they are not your products. Advocacy is not a way for a company to
cram more marketing messages to customers. Rather, it requires a mutual dialogue and a
partnership that assumes if companies advocate for customers, those customers will reciprocate
with their trust, purchases, and an enduring loyalty. This is a partnership between customers and
companies for their mutual good. There is a duality in advocacy. If companies advocate for
their customers, these customers will grant the company their trust. This can lead to growth in
sales and profits because customers will choose the company's products and believe the extra
value reflected in a higher price is worth it. If customers trust the company, they will tell others
about the positive partnership, which will reduce customer acquisition costs as well as provide
an opportunity to sell a wider range of products to the customer.
6
Customer
Advocacy
Relationship
Marketing
TQM
Customer
Satisfaction
Figure 1 – The Advocacy Pyramid
Advocacy is a major step forward in the evolving relationship between the firm and its
customers. Advocacy’s predecessor, relationship marketing, was impelled by the saturation of
push marketing and intense rivalry, particularly around quality. Advocacy is becoming an
imperative because of the growth of customer power. In Figure 1, you will see the pyramid of
advocacy. Advocacy has its base in TQM and customer satisfaction – quality products and
satisfied customers are core prerequisites for being able to honestly -- and profitably -- advocate
for customers. Advocacy is supported at the middle by relationship marketing – learning about
each customer and creating a relationship with that customer helps the company know enough
about the customer to become the customer’s advocate. But the pinnacle is advocacy.
As you reach the top of the pyramid, CRM is used differently. Instead of a targeting of
promotion and company communication, it is a program designed to build advocacy based on
balanced and transparent information plus advice on how to make the best decision. CRM
would be better called Advocacy Relationship Development in the advocacy sphere of activity.
Likewise, one-to-one and permission marketing is not simply more micro granularity in
delivering promotion and company product information. Rather, it becomes a mutual dialogue
between single customers and the firm to maximize the customers interest over the available
products in the market.
Although this article stresses the consumer side of marketing, these recommendations are even
more applicable when the customer is another business. In industrial marketing, the 20 percent
of the sales force that sells 80 percent of the volume owes much of its success to building
7
advocacy-based relationships with clients. Often the best sales person will advocate for his/her
customer by helping solve the customer’s problem even if the company’s products are not
involved.
Where Are You on the Trust Dimension?
Trust is the key to an advocacy strategy – the company must become trustworthy in the eyes of
its customers. This means more than saying “trust us.” It does mean taking steps that create a
true trust-based relationship between company and customer. The first step in formulating an
advocacy strategy is to find out where a company currently is on the overall dimensions of trust
and the components that build trust. The next step is to
8
Figure 2 – Overall Trust Rating For Three Marketing Strategies
Distrust
High Trust
Skeptical
Not Confident
Disloyal
Believe
Confront
Loyal
P
R
A
P = Push
R = Relationship
A = Advocate
9
Transparency
Distorted, Hidden
Information
Product/Service
Quality
Low Product
Service Quality
Fail to meet
promises
Incentive
Incentives aligned
for company, not
customer gains
P
R
P
P
Partnering with
P
Customers
Leave customer to
work out their own
problems
Co operating
Design
Customers are
sold company
solution
Product
Comparison
No comparison or
biased comparison
Supply Chain
Customer trust
conflict
in channel
P
A
R
R
A
R
A
R
P
A
R
P
A
A
Full, honest
information
Quality
Best product
and service to
fulfill
expectations
Incentives
aligned so
employees
trust and meet
customer need
Help
Customers
learn and help
themselves
Customers help
design products
individually and
through
communities
Compare
your product
to competition
honestly
All supply chain
partners
aligned to build
trust
R
Comprehensiveness
Marketing pushes
services and
products
P
R
A
10
Figure 3
All functions
work to build
trust
define where the company wants to be on trust dimension and, finally, to formulate programs to
get there.
In Figure 2, I show scales for overall trust and position the three marketing strategies on them. A
company should determine its specific trust position by market research (see side bar on How to
Measure Trust) or executive judgment. An example of a push strategy would be the typical
telecommunication company (e.g., Sprint, Verizon, Cingular). Customer trust is not high in
them as compared to a company following a relationship or advocacy strategy. A typical
example of a company following a relationship strategy would be an auto company (e.g. ,Ford,
GM, BMW). A good example of an advocacy company would be an independent Internet travel
service (Travelocity, Expedia, or Orbitz). The second step is to describe the profile of advocacy
elements that can create trust. In Figure 3, the three strategies are evaluated on eight strategy
components. In practice the specific company would be rated individually on the scales.
Examining the profile component ratings allows one to tell why the overall trust ratings are high
or low.
Transparency: This dimension rates the honesty and openness of company information. To
develop a trust-based relationship with customers, a company must become more transparent to
those customers. Perhaps the highest levels of transparency would be for travel services, which
provide information on virtually all flights and rates. Wireless Telecom services would be rated
the lowest because of their complex fee structures. For example, a recent SPRINT wireless ad in
the Boston Globe advertised 1000 anytime minutes for $40. This $.04/minute deal sounds good
until one sees the copious very fine print that stated there was a $36 dollar activation fee, $150
early termination fee, $.50/minute for minutes off the company's network which covers only 80
percent of the USA, and other conditions that may apply.
Product Service and Quality: Without quality, companies can never honestly recommend their
products and without honest recommendations, there can be no trust and no advocacy. Thus
11
companies need to evaluate their own products and services. Push strategies may use price to
cover up marginal quality, but relationship strategies and advocacy strategies require high
product and service quality. Airlines rate low on this scale as unilateral cost reductions, staff
cuts, crowding of seats, and long check-in times have made travel distasteful. In the 1980s, USA
auto companies had low quality when compared to Japanese autos, but these firms have been
working hard to reduce defect levels and have achieved higher J.D. Powers’ ratings. So, in
Figure 2, auto companies would be rated well on quality and service. Advocacy requires a
better level of quality than a relationship strategy. Without the best products, a firm honestly
trying to represent the customer interests will not be able to recommend its products.
Product Comparison: In a world of high customer power, trying to push inappropriate products
onto customers is more likely to create enemies than revenues. Although a company may have
good products, only an arrogant marketer or salesperson would think that the company's products
are the best possible products for every possible customer. If a company is to use an advocacy
strategy, it must be willing to tell prospective customers when they should seek out competitors’
products. A stellar example is the auto industry, where KBB (Kelly’s Blue Book), Autobytel,
Car Point, Cars Direct and others provide honest and unbiased information and comparisons to
consumers across all brands.
Incentives: Customers are sensitive to what the incentives are for the seller and give full trust
only when they are convinced the firm is serious about creating a mutually-rewarding long-run
relationship. A good example of a company that tries to maximize its alignment with customers
is the discount broker, Charles Schwab and Company. Unlike many other retail brokerage firms,
Schwab's brokers are paid a straight salary with no commissions for "churning" the client
account. Moreover, Schwab does no investment banking and is thus free to offer unbiased
ratings of companies’ stocks. The company provides a range of online tools that allow
customers to research companies and make their own sound investment choices. Schwab would
be rated near the advocacy level on the incentives scale.
Partnering: Developing trust means showing the customer that a company is "on his/her side."
12
One good approach to this is to help customers help themselves. This tactic expands on the
notion of a consultative selling relationship to more of a pure consulting engagement. A good
example is GE, which is sharing its business knowledge of Six Sigma and business process
improvement with its industrial customers through customized workshops and consulting
engagements. Although altruistic in appearance, helping customers in areas outside of the strict
boundaries of a company's product line provides great value to the company by helping its
customers succeed and stay in business.
Cooperative Design: By realizing that customers are intelligent and responsible, companies can
come to rely on their customers for information and even design ideas. Some companies go even
further and attempt to supply their customers with “tool kits” to aid them in creating solutions to
their problems that may lead to successful launches of products for the company11. Firms can be
engaged individually by lead user methods or through user communities. For example, a number
of computer companies, including Dell, Apple, and HP, have created online discussion forums
where customers may discuss the company's products.
Supply Chain: A company is only as trustworthy as its business partners, so the supply chain
dimension rates the alignment of channel partners to the company's trust initiatives. In many
industries, the manufacturer relies on a network of channel partners, such as distributors or
retailers. Thus, these distributors and retailers play a major role in creating the brand image and
customer relationship. Companies that implement an advocacy marketing strategy must work
with their channel partners to create and reinforce trust. The actions of pushy retail salespeople
or shady distributors can damage a hard-won reputation for being trustworthy.
Comprehensive: As stressed above, trust seems to be the responsibility of the marketing,
advertising, distribution, and sales functions of the firm. But, in reality, creating an advocacy
strategy requires more pervasive changes that reach across the organization. For example,
11
Stefan Thomke and Eric Von Hippel, “Customers as Innovators: A New Way to Create Value” Harvard Business
Review (April 2002).
13
engineering, production, and R&D are critical to creating trustworthy products that meet
customer needs and meet customer standards. Pricing should reflect the premium value of the
product and what trust is worth to the customer. Financial allocations need to reflect the long-run
return horizon of an advocacy strategy. Human resources, training and hiring must align with
the advocacy view of customers so that all interfaces of the firm are coherent with an overall
trust-based strategy. The culture of the firm must reflect the primacy of customer advocacy. This
advocacy culture extends beyond engendering trust from customers to include earning the trust
of employees and stockholders. If employees do not trust the company, customers will not trust
the firm either. The CEO must be active in this cultural revolution by leading the effort and by
creating incentives and organizational structures that encourage long-run trust-building programs
and executives who advocate for the customer. Therefore, the "comprehensive" dimension rates
the cross-functional participation and consistency in building advocacy.
Where Do You Want to Be on the Trust Dimension?
The previous section outlined a profiling tool that can allow firms to evaluate their
position on the trust dimension. Next, companies need to evaluate their current position relative
to where they would like to be on that dimension.
If a company wants to move further to the right on the trust dimension, a range of strategies are
available. If a company has a push position on trust and wanted to move right on trust to the
relationship level (review figure 2), it could do so by examining the component scales in Figure
2. If the firm is low on transparency, it should build honest, open information systems for its
products. If the company rates low on product quality, it can embrace one of many existing
TQM programs. More typically, a firm would move from a relationship position to advocacy.
Here you need a profile shift in addition to transparency and quality. The company can build
advocacy through training, hiring better staff, and designing employee incentives so that
employees are rewarded when customers succeed. It could partner with its customers through
14
market research and communities to get suggestions for new product improvements. The
company can use fair comparisons to competitive products to build customer confidence that it
has the best products, and it can train its supply chain to be as trust-oriented as the company
itself. Finally, the company can build a culture of consumer advocacy across all areas of the
firm.
Many firms could be cited for their success in building trust programs (see Ebay sidebar for one
example), but here are some specific trust-building programs where systematic research has been
done.
Intel:
Intel decided it wanted to increase the trust on its download site (the site where customers can
download software from Intel), and it performed systematic market experimentation on the site
to improve the ease of navigation. Intel found that improved navigation increased download
success by a factor of 5 percent points, and this saved the company $10 million per year by
reducing telephone support calls and mailing costs. It also reduced the service demands on
channel partners. Further experiments on the camera download site led to a software-based
personal advisor named “Rosa,” who helped customers identify their PC camera, select the best
download, and get all their questions answered. This advisor improved satisfaction, trust, and
success rates for downloading by a factor of 15 percent for visitors who used the site12.
Currently, Intel is expanding the use of software-based trusted advisors to across its support site.
Credit unions: Trustworthy service is a common sentiment expressed by the mission statements
of virtually all credit unions – these financial services organizations pledge to serve the interests
of their members. But going beyond these words, innovative credit unions (e.g., First Tech ,
which serves Intel and Microsoft and the Northwest U.S. region), SACU (serving San Antonio’s
diverse population), Mission Federal (San Diego), and Patelco (Colorado) have recently
12
Glen L. Urban, et. al. "Adaptive Site Experimentation to Build Trust" MIT Sloan working Paper, 2003
15
implemented online trusted advisors. These online trusted advisors are web-based tools that help
credit union customers select mortgages, loan programs, deposit accounts, IRAs, and wealth
management.13 The mortgage advisor system asks an individually-customized set of questions
on the left side of the screen while the right side of the screen presents explanations of terms and
options along with advice and caveats. The purpose of the tool is to educate customers about the
complexity of mortgages and help them select the “perfect mortgage” for them. These Internet
advisors are highly rated by their users (95 percent would recommend the mortgage selector to a
friend). In addition to serving members better, the credit unions have found that their mortgage
business has grown over 65 percent (after correcting for interest rate changes) after
implementing online advisors14. Although meant for the customer, the online advisor also
provides a true time-saving tool for loan officers -- doubling their output of mortgages -- and
providing real-time training for phone center personnel to ensure coherence of the message
across communication channels (physical outlet, phone, Internet, direct mail and email). Credit
unions' advocacy-based strategies are enabling their growth and building a mutuality of interest
with customers. Perhaps the country’s 10,000 credit unions will evolve into major competitors
of big banks and financial services firms.
General Motors: General Motors is moving from a relationship position to advocacy on the
trust dimension. They have created a trusted advisor called AutoChoiceAdvisor, which is
sponsored by GM and J.D. Powers. It is implemented as a separate site and through third-party
sites like Kelly’s Blue Book and Car Talk as a “decision aid” and certified to be unbiased by
these third parties. 700,000 people visited the site in 2003. The advisor asks car buyers to state
overall preferences on how they plan to use the car, how much they are willing to pay, what
features they feel strongly about, and what brands they like or dislike. After answering as many
13
supplied by Experion Systems Inc.
14
Glen L. Urban Digital Marketing Strategy (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.), p. 161-62.
16
-- or as few -- preference questions as they choose, the site presents a ranked list of the top eight
vehicles that best fit their needs. The tool uses unbiased data from AIC (Automotive
Information Center) and J.D. Power & Associates. Even though it is sponsored by GM, the site
often advocates the purchase of non-GM vehicles. The auto advisor has been expanded to
include explicit product development feedback by having a virtual engineer listen in on the
dialogue between the advisor and the customer to learn about unmet needs and opportunities for
design improvements.15 The AutoChoiceAdvisor is now part of an expanded trust program that
includes a comparative drive program called “Auto Show in Motion” (in 2003 more than
200,000 people drove autos from GM and other manufacturers). This was leveraged by a dealer
24-hour test drive program for GM cars. Current efforts are on a TRM (Trust Relationship
Management) system that would include outbound communication in response to life events
(e.g., new child, off to college, accident, retirement, etc.) to build an enduring relationship, active
community development (moderated community space to get design input and build
relationships), enhanced loyalty programs through MyGMlink, and integration with ONSTAR
mobile services. Finally, GM is involving customers in the design of its new hydrogen fuel cell
vehicle through an active Internet community sponsored by GM. These programs move GM
significantly to the right on transparency, partnering, co-operative design, and product
comparisons. The programs have increased the rate at which GM autos are seriously considered
for purchase and have subsequently increased sales.
Companies should examine their company strengths and weaknesses and look at the
opportunity/threat posed by the growth in customer power.
15
Glen L. Urban and John R. Hauser, "Listening In to Find and Explore New Combinations of Customer Needs'
MIT Sloan School of Management (forthcoming Journal of Marketing), 2004
17
Is Advocacy for You?
If this author is to follow his own advice, he should alert businesses to the alternatives to trustbased marketing and note that a advocacy strategy is not suitable for everyone. Indeed, many
companies face competitive situations, company operating conditions, or customer
characteristics that preclude the use of advocacy.
Developing high levels of trust by advocacy can pay off in industries characterized by the
following attributes: 1) the products are complex, 2) the products require high customer
involvement, 3) customers face a risk of loss if they do not select the right product, 4) many
alternative products exist, and 5) large amounts of information are available. In contrast,
industries are less amenable to advocacy strategy if: 1) products are undifferentiated, highly
standardized commodities, 2) customers are deal prone and only evaluate price, 3) customer have
low involvement with the products, or 4) there are no alternatives to the firms products. In
addition, the firm's goals can impact the choice of strategy. If short run results are most
important and the emphasis is not on long term profit and return on investment, then advocacy
may not be useful. Advocacy gives up short-term profits for sustained long-term returns.
Many firms sell products that fit the attribute designation of advocacy above and now have
relationship programs, so it is natural for them to respond to the increasing levels of customer
power with a movement from relationship to advocacy on the trust dimension.
But even firms with a push positioning on trust can consider significant movement to the right.
For example, consider telecommunication firms which fit the push profile in Figure 2. However,
Qwest, a company that arguably started with the lowest levels of trust due to charges of fraud
and accounting irregularities, is now pursuing a trust-building strategy. Under the leadership of
its new CEO, Richard C. Notebaert, it began a campaign called “generations of service” to
rebuild employee trust and pride. Next, Qwest developed a “commitment to service” campaign
based on improved TQM procedures and better training of call center personnel. Qwest then
18
simplified its rate plans by charging a flat five cents per minute and reduced its outbound
marketing (uninvited calling). Now, Qwest is developing MyQwest.com, which stresses
“customer service that really serves customers,” and it will have a virtual advisor to help people
select the best service package for them after considering all plans, including those of
competitors. The concept is to move to the full trust level (Qwest calls it “blind trust”) of Figure
2 by advocacy strategies and tactics that span all the functions of the company and take this
advocacy strategy nationwide.
Although some market situations may seem to make trust an inappropriate choice, in the end it is
up to the senior management to examine the space and see if more trust-oriented strategy is for
them. I predict that in most cases innovative managers will see that responding to the rise of
customer power with advocacy-based strategies is the way to maximize long-run profits.
The Paradigm is Shifting – Pioneers Will Gain Advantages
Evidence is building that the paradigm of marketing is changing from the push strategies suited
to 1950-1990 era of mass media to relationship marketing of the 1990s and now to advocacybased strategies that are essential in an era of growing customer power. Managers need to
decide where their firms should be in the spectrum from push to advocacy. There are advantages
to being a first mover in the advocacy space, because once customers develop a trusting
relationship with a firm, they are not likely to quickly switch to a competitor. Trust creates a
barrier to entry by increasing customer loyalty and by forcing would-be competitors to spend
more time and resources to develop a trusted reputation. Even if firms enter and try to compete
on the trust dimension, the pioneers will have a superior position if they continue to innovate in
the design of advocacy programs. In contrast, not embracing advocacy presents a risk to a firm’s
growth and returns if competitors gain the trust of customers first. The movement to a trust19
based strategy does present short-run challenges, but it also offers major long-run opportunities.
Although trust is not the best response in all situations, innovative firms are moving now to
implement advocacy based strategies, and early adopters are formulating action plans to
advocate and partner with customers. I predict advocacy will increasingly become the norm of
behavior in the next 10 years as the new paradigm becomes established and firms meet the threat
(and opportunity) of the growth in customer power.
Sidebars
S.1. Measuring Trust
Trust can be evaluated by executive judgment, but it is better to do so by market research.
Customers often have different levels of trust than managers think they do. One can measure
overall trust by a single scale such as:
"Agree or Disagree with the following statement -- 1 means strongly disagree, 2 disagree, 3
neither agree nor disagree, 4 agree, and 5 strongly agree"
I trust Company X
__ __ __ __ __
1
2
3
4
20
5
But it is better to have multiple measures. Theory suggests three dimensions of trust -- integrity,
ability, and benevolence -- so it is recommended that you measure overall trust and the following
component measures16:
"Agree or Disagree with the following statement"
1
2
3
4
5
Promises made by Company X are likely to be reliable.
__ __ __ __ __
Company X understands the market in which they work.
__ __ __ __ __
I expect that Company X puts customer interests before their own. __ __ __ __ __
S.2 eBay Becomes the Killer Application through Trust
In 2002, over $10 billion dollars of goods exchanged hands at eBay.
The keys to eBay’s success are its multiple mechanisms that help buyers and sellers trust each
other. One such mechanism tracks the reputations of participants through the feedback between
buyers and sellers. Buyers can enter feedback (positive, neutral, or negative rating and
description) about a seller and vise versa. Sellers get star ratings based on the number of positive
votes (from yellow at 10-99 votes to Gold at 10,000 votes or higher) and the stars appear next to
their items. This mutual rating leads to a trust that allows even large amounts of money to be
transferred without even seeing an item. Sellers can upgrade to be “Power Sellers” if they
16
see David Gefen, "Reflections on the Dimensions of Trust and Trustworthiness among Online Consumers," The
Data Base for Advanced Information Systems v. 3, no. 3, pp 38-53, 2002, and Iakov Bart, V. Shankar, F. Sultan, G.
Urban, "Determinants and Role of Trust on the Internet: A Large Scale Empirical Study: MIT Sloan Working
Paper, September 2003, for a discussion of measurement.
21
embrace the core values of the eBay community and maintain 98 percent positive feedback.
This results in a "Power Seller" label next to their items.
The behavior of bidders on eBay illustrates the profitability of creating trust through reputation.
Trustworthy eBay sellers -- those that build a good reputation with buyers through multiple
transactions -- enjoy higher prices for their goods at auction. A controlled experiment found that
buyers bid 7.6 percent more for goods listed by repeat sellers with high reputations17. Ebay’s
feedback systems create the transparency needed for buyers to assign higher monetary values to
reputation.
Ebay also has an aggressive fraud protection program, ensuring that less than .01 percent of
transactions are affected by fraud. Buyers who change IDs in the last 30 days are flagged with a
pair of dark sunglasses to indicate there may be a reason why the person changed his/her ID. For
more valuable items, an escrow service is available at Escrow.com that ensures that both the
money and the goods reach their respective parties. Another company, Squaretrade.com,
provides a range of reputation-enhancing services -- allowing sellers to display a seal that
protects buyers from fraud ($450) and providing dispute resolution services.
These trust builders have enabled eBay to grow and support commerce between millions of
seemingly anonymous buyers and sellers. Ebay has even become a major force in used car sales
($2.5 billion in 2002).18 Some buyers trust eBay’s used car selling system so much that they will
travel hundreds of miles to pick up their used car without seeing it in person (they only see it in
the detailed pictures and information on the site). Trust is a critical element in eBay’s success.
17
Resnic, Paul, Richard Zeckjhauser, John Swanson, and Kate Lockwood, “The Value of Reputation on eBay: A
Controlled Experiment,” Working Paper RWP03-007 (John F. Kennedy School of Government), July 6, 2002.
18
Wall Street Journal “Ebay is Emerging as an Unlikely Giant in Used Car Sales” Feb. 7, 2003, p.A8
22
S.3. From McGregor's Theory X & Theory Y to Theory P & Theory A
In 1960, McGregor introduced Theory X and Theory Y on the management of employees.
Theory X represented an old style of management in which employees were mindless
automatons that had to be pushed into working. Theory Y represented a new style of
management in which employees were intelligent, responsible individuals that could be trusted
to do a good job. The theory of push-based marketing (Theory P) vs. the theory of advocacybased marketing (Theory A) is analogous to McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y. Just as
Theory X and Theory Y are distinguished by management's assumptions about employees, so,
too, Theory P and Theory A are marketing's assumptions about customers. The point is: What
does your company assume about its customers?
Assumptions About Employees
Assumptions About Customers
23
Theory X
Theory P -- PUSH
New Assumptions
Old Assumptions
Employees dislike work
Customers
avoid
decision-making
responsibility
Employees must be coerced before they
will work
Customers are passive and must be
coerced
Employees prefer to be directed.
Customers have difficulty learning and
Employees avoid responsibility.
prefer to be influenced
Customers have little imagination
Theory Y
Theory A --ADVOCACY
Employees will exercise self-direction
Customer decision-making is natural
Employees will become committed based Customers are active and want to control
on ego satisfaction
the buying process
Employees seek and accept responsibility
Customers prefer to learn and make an
Employees have imagination, ingenuity informed decision
and creativity
Customers have imagination, ingenuity
and creativity
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
24
Research leading to these observations was funded by the eBusiness Center at MIT, General
Motors Corporation, and Intel Corporation. Special thanks to: Vince Barabba, Ross Blair, Iakov
Bart, Mary Murphy-Hoye, Jeff Katz, Melanie Kittrell, Andrea and Dana Meyer, Stefania Nappi,
Brian Rhodes, Venkatesh Shankar, Ron Shelvin, and Fareena Sultan. Finally, to my MIT
Research Assistants: David Gagnon, Mahesh Kumar, Susan Lee, Lauren McCann, Rami Musa,
Fernando Ramirez, Siva Ravikumar, Jessica Santiago, and Telmo Valido.
25